
y 




) 



I 945 
:8 R4 
318 
opy 1 



v hf% i 



If 






3ty ?red ifc/«/d« 



PORTT.AM), OREGON 



I mi r'i 



Circular Mo. 15: 



July va, mm. 



Copyright 1938. 



& 



& 

M 

cV 



JUL 31 1918 ©CU499980 

$> 5' o o 









The Control of the Bollweevil 



Copyright, 1918. By FRED REINLEIN, Portland, Ore. 
Circular No. 152. February 4, 1918 



The Bureau of Entomology, in getting out Farmers' Bulle- 
tin No. 848 in August, 1917, has defined what the men in charge 
profess to know to be the best means of controlling the boll- 
weevil. The means described are nothing but the old rotten 
stuff that had been dished up for many years, and which has 
been fully dissected by me during years past, the evidence I 
thus gave having shown the inadaquacy and often utter imprac- 
ticability of the means advocated by the Bureau, and means 
were shown by me that gave the result desired. The Bureau 
has never discussed these means, although they have often told 
Members of Congress they had done so. The responsibility for 
this rests upon the Chairmen of the Congressional Committees 
on Agriculture, who never did anything to force the Bureau to 
show why the means shown by me should not be satisfactory. 

As the chief means of control is given the early destruction 
of all cotton plants in the fall. This is a correct idea, provided, 
first, no one can show you a way by which you can make the 
plants bear till frost, which I shall show can be done and, sec- 
ond, that this- does not cause the bollweevil to adapt itself to 
feed on plants related to cotton or cause it to accustom itself to 
live without food during this period. That the weevil is adapt- 
ing itself to an absence of all cotton in the fall, there is much 
evidence, and for this reason I shall show how I had modified, 
during the past two years, my original system of control to meet 
the requirements of the case. 



u) 

In his zeal to convince you of the profitableness of the eaij}' 
destruction of all the cotton plants in the fall, Dr. W. D. Hunter, in 
charge of the work, tells } 7 ou on page 18 that 410 acres were thus 
cleared in Calhoun County. Texas, and the profit was $14.56 
an acre. "This was 29 times the cost of uprooting and burning 
the plants." Thus the work cost $14.56 divided by 29, or 50 1-5 
cents per acre. Can you have this work done at this rate? Dr. 
Hunter does not teJl you that the work was done in 1906 in a 
section having low-priced labor. Even there the work could not 
be done now at this cost. But the big little end of the humbug 
comes in by Dr. Hunter not telling you, with the approval of 
his worth} 7 chief, what the conditions were. As pointed out as 
far back as 1908 in my Circulars No. 84 and 85, and carried out 
more in detail in my Circulars No. 115, 129, 139 and 141, these 
fields were near the sea. hence weevils hunting in search of food 
in that direction had not even as much chance of survival as on 
land devoid of cotton The nearest cotton was 15 miles away, 
This seemed to have been but a small patch, for the fields used 
for checks were 30 miles away. Figuring at a distance of only 
15 miles, the 410 acres cleared represented only about the one 
three thousandth part of the area included in the circle having 
a radius of 15 miles; hence the weevils deprived of food and 
scattered over this area in search of it, had in the spring only 
one chance in three thousand to find food, as compared with us- 
ual conditions, where one acre in five is given to cotton, where, 
therefore, on the average, the hibernated w 7 eevil finds food on 
ever} 7 fifth acre. Thus under usual conditions the chances of in- 
fectation in the spring are 600 times greater. If you can plow out 
the stalks and burn them under usual conditions tor 50 cents, 
there, the benefit will be $14.50 divided by 600, 
which gives you a return of 2^2 cents for an outlay of 50 cents. 
This assumes that you can destroy cotton over a territory large 
enough to make your place safe; and this includes destruction of 
all volunteer cotton. The tests were made about 75 miles south- 
west of Galveston. To get anywhere the same results in Tennes- 
see the work w 7 ould have to be done about September 1st. This 



JUL 31 1918 



(3) 

shows the need of a better method, especially in the northern 
half of the belt. 

"Other methods are applicable to different conditions" sa3'S 
Dr. Hunter on page 20, but what those methods are he does not 
say. But he sa} 7 s. ...The difficulty in one method of removing 
the plants — that of cutting them off near the surface of the 
ground with a stalk cutter or ax, is that during mild seasons ma- 
ny sprouts soon make their appearance to furnish food for wee- 
vils that would otherwise starve during the fall and winter.. The 
great objection is that innumerable weevils in the bolls and 
squares will be allowed to develop." This is correct, but Dr. 
Hunter is not correct when he continues: Nothing but uproot- 
ing and burning will fully meet the exigencies caused b> r the 
weevil, but the burning must be looked upon as an emergency 
measure especially necessary in regions recently invaded by the 
weevil and to be replaced by burying after a few } r ears." 

As far back as 19 13 I had shown in my Circular No. 134 a 
way that fully met the exigencies of the case, if we asume that 
tne boll weevil cannot adapt itself to feed and breed upon plants 
other than cotton. If it can- and you will be left to judge 
whether or not it can — the method in its original form will not 
answer any more than will destruction of all cotton b> 7 up- 
rooting and burning even if done by magic at no cost. The 
method consisted in showing how the plants can be cut off with 
the V stalk cutter without giving rise to sprouts. 

The V stalk cutter, used as originally advocated by cotton 
planters left well developed eyes above the surface, about the 
base of many if not most plants, resulting in sprouts if there 
was enough moisture. As these sprouts do not offer ovipositing 
material, the female has to hunt for cotton elsewhere, or else for 
related plants that give a reasonable promise of successfully 
serving as breeding material, hence the danger from sprouts con- 
sists in that feeding upon sprouts might reduce the rate of mor- 
tality existing. There is no conclusive evidence that such is 



(4) 

the case to any appreciable extent, chiefly because the adults, 
when starved, can fly for many miles to find cotton. However, 
I had not only shown how these sprouts can be avoided, but al- 
so how the field can be turned into pasture within a few weeks 
after the plants were cut off and burned. Since then, in my Cir- 
cular No. 151, p. 5, I have shown that the necessity for burning 
can be removed, as will be shown. 

The plan consists in slightly throwing the earth towards the 
plants at the last 2 or 3 cultivations and sowing a crop of vetches 
or other legume at the last cultivation. This causes the eyes 
that do develop near the base of the plant to develop 2 to 4 
inches higher up than they would otherwise do. When the V 
stalk cutter is then used the weight of the tool rests upon 3 points, 
the nose, and where each arm rests upon the row. The stalks are 
thus cut off much more evenly and also several inches below the 
lowest developed eyes, hence no sprouts can appear. The nose of 
course, must ride upon a shoe of some sort, to avoid injuring 
the young forage plants Neither Dr. Hunter nor his Chief, nor 
any of the members of Congress directly charged by law to 
guard the farming interests could be made to talk on this point. 
Yet the Entomologist, as shown throughout my Circular No. 
151, has repeatedly told Members of Congress I am wrong all 
around. Of course it is a disgrace to them to swallow such gab 
without being shown. Only once with Hon. John E. Raker, as 
explained in detail 011 pages 15 to 21 of mv Circular No. 151, 
did the Entomologist go into any details at all upon the various 
issues he is wanted to talk on, and immediately stopped this up- 
on finding that Mr. Raker gave ma a chance at defense by giv- 
ing me a copy of the reply he got. 

If an insect is attacked by a more or less complete, system- 
atic and unseasonable destruction of its exclusive food plant year 
after year, it will try to adapt itself to survive without this food. 
That the boll weevil has a strong capacity along this line you 
can see from a case where in a cage started September 28, 1908 



(5) 

at Mansura, La., by the Louisiana Crop Pest Commission, there 
survived a weevil which lived till June 9. 1909. This weevil had 
to survive a temperature that caused the weevils for weeks to 
crawl on the screen hoping to get away; had no access to water 
or dew as it would have had outside; had no access to cool shad- 
ed places as the weevils have outside; had food removed at once, 
whereas outside this is impossible, since even if all plants could 
be uprooted in one day, they would still offer food for several 
days, making the change to no food gradual. And the rainfall 
for October was only 0.28 inch. 

Again: a cage started October 26, 1908 by the Louisiana 
Crop Pest commission, with a mean temperature of 51.9 degrees 
for the week following the caging, gave a survival of 25.12 per 
cent; while a cage started November 23, with a mean tempera- 
ture of 70.36 degrees for the week following the caging, gave on- 
ly a survival of 12.67 per cent. As far back as 1912 I had shown 
in my Circular No. 128 from the results secured in all of these 
test cages, by figuring out the mean temperature for the days 
following immediately the caging, that, at any given time, the 
high or low survival was regulated by the high or low tempera- 
ture prevaling immediately at caging time. Since in the open a 
weevil deprived of food can secrete itself in the woods where the 
mean temperature is by October 1st somewhere around 55 de- 
grees, early destruction ot stalks is beneficial as a means of wee- 
vil control chiefly by stopping further breeding. 

Plowing out and burning the stalks cannot be carried out in 
a general way quick enough, if it be done at all, hence under 
this plan little good results can be expected to follow on the 
whole. Fields that are cleared, turn off their weevils to fields 
not cleared, and fields cleared by good management can then 
produce "a profitable crop through proper methods" as Dr. 
Hunter shows on page 1, but with all fields cleared and all loca- 
ted alike, infestation of all in the spring will be about the same. 

On page 22 Dr. Hunter warms up the old story about a 
neglected peach orchard across a narrow lane on one side of the 



(6) 

experimental cotton field of 40 acres. "Every season the first 
weevil infestation in the cotton was found in the immediate vi- 
cing of the orchard." 

According to Dr. Hunter to eliminate the hibernating' quar- 
ters across the lane meant only the prevention of the growth of 
weeds. But the rough bark of the trees might have been the 
chief attraction, as was shown to him as far back as 1909, in my 
Circular No. 102. If the weeds do attract the weevils, I was of- 
fering a pretty good means of control when I, previous to 191 3, 
suggested to plant corn around the cotton fields, letting the cot- 
ton stalks stand till hibernation has taken place. What weevils 
then would go outside would mostly go to hibernate in the corn. 
But then Dr, Hunter violentlv declared they would go to the 
woods, So they would, provided the woods are not too far off. 
Of course both corn and cotton stalks were then to be destroyed 
by plowing down before emergence could begin, Plowing down 
cotton stalks was also condemned as utterly impracticable, but 
now he recommends it himself, that too in the early fall, when 
the soil is apt to be dry and hard, With the proper use of a 
heavy chain these stalks can be easily completely plowed in. 

Suppose instead of an orchard there had been woodland, 
what would Dr. Hunter have recommended then? Well, nothing 
but planting as far as possible away. And as for what numbers 
of weevils there are out of reach in the woods you gain an idea 
from page 168 of State Crop Pest Commission of Louisiana 
Circular No. 31. "..,Froman elm tree located in the swamp, "4 
of a mile from the nearest field, (Spanish) moss was gathered 
from the limbs at a hight of 15 feet. The ground in the swamp 
was covered w T ith water and a dense growth of cane, 12 to 15 ft. 
high, occurred all about the tree. In this moss was found 3,158 
weevils to the ton..." 

But now as to the tendency of the weevil to feed and breed 
in plants other than cotton; 'In laboratory experiments perform- 
ed by B. R. Coad, a weevil developed in the bud of a wild plant 
related to cotton. Under natural conditions it has not been 



(7) 

found developing in that plant, but the experiments may indicate 
a tendency for the insect to acquire a new food plant.." (p. u) 

"May indicate," you see. And if it does? Dr. Hunter offers 
not the slightest suggestion, "in the adult stage the boll weevil 
frequently has been found in okra blooms, but repeated observa- 
tions and experiments have failed to show that it places its eggs 
in the pods or can develop in them." This apparently while cot- 
ton was available. "When confined in bottles the adult weevil 
will feed upon various substances such as apples and bananas, 
but this is only under stress of starvation." All this shows that 
the weevil does possess a tendency to acquire new food plant. 

Mr. Coad writes on this point as follows in U. S. Depart- 
ment of Agriculture Bulletin, No. 231, page 3, issued Aug. 2, 
1915: "During the summer of 1913, following the discovery of a 
boll weevil feeding on cultivated Hibiscus syriacus at Victoria, 
Texas, the writer succeeded in rearing the species on buds of 
this plant, fed them for some time, and noted the partially com- 
pleted development in buds of Callirrhoe involucrata and C. 
pedata, and kept them alive on Sphacralcea lindheimcri buds 
for a short period." 

"in the above series of experiments, by alternating foods 
it was found that the weevils have a wide range of hitherto un- 
suspected adaptability. This discovery makes the presence of 
malvaceous plants in the vicinity of cotton a possibly important 
factor in the ultimate control of the species — " 

Of course, as long as there is cotton, the weevil wants noth- 
ing better. But with the food supply cut off more or less ever} 7 
fall, the weevil has the choice to learn to starve along, or to feed 
and breed in related plants. As there is a good supply of relat- 
ed plants available, destruction of cotton becomes yearly more 
and more harmless to the weevil. Thus in this event what Dr. 
Hunter now orfert as the chief means of control loses its value. 

Were once the weevil accustomed to breeding in plants re- 
lated to cotton, this would be likely to extend the period of 



(8) 

breeding both in the fall and in the spring. All this shows the 
need of a method of control that will make it possible to actually 
kill the weevils and without scattering the weevils to plants oth- 
er than cotton. Dr. Hunter has absolutely nothing of this kind. 
I shall describe such a way evolved by me during the last three 
years. 

In the case of infestation from the peach orchard above re- 
ferred to, Dr, Hunter says: "...the infestation always started at 
that point and radiated into the field..." This brings up the 
question of what might be done to reduce the number of hiber- 
nated weevils in the spring. 

Woods, or even only vegetation of scrubby growth, or a 
strong stand of grass would all have the effect of enabling large 
numbers of weevils to survive the winter. Pastures and mead- 
ows should not be closely cropped for several very good reasonr, 
the chief ones being to avoid erosion and enable them to with- 
stand the effects of winter. All such make good hibernating 
quarters for weevils and other insects, injurious, beneficial and 
neutral ones. What is the use to talk about the benefit to be 
derived from beneficial insects, or birds, if } t ou give them no 
chance to survive? 

How these and other places, such as sorgum stubble, can 
be cleared of weevil better than by any other way except perhaps 
burning, which is highly injurious and causes erosion, will be 
shown later. 

On page 22 Dr. Hunter calls attention to sorghum stubble 
as highly favorable for hibernating places. "A little work in the 
fall or winter will result in the destruction of practically all of 
the weevils found there." Wherein this "little work" does con- 
sist he is careful not to say. If there is any little work that ap- 
proximates such results other than striking a match while the 
stubble is dry, I do not know of it, 

Slopes and river banks must be protected by rough vegeta- 
tion to prevent erosion and provide protection against da'nage 



(9) 

by floods. For details see Yearbook Separate No. 688: Farms, 
Forests and Erosion. 

I had shown as far back as my Circular No. 117, in 19 10, 
carrying it out minutely in my Circular No. 127, 1912, from the 
results of tests made by Dr. Hunter, that the weevils as they 
arrive settle at the edge of the field. I showed that as long as 
there are no squares they stay at the edge. Thus in case infes- 
tation starts at a point, or at a side near timber or a fence row, 
the weevils will be practically all at this point or side, clustering 
to the outer rows as long as there are no squares. It has been 
shown that 50 per cent of these might be 'killed by an applica- 
tion of poison. But when squares are set the use of poison 
ceases since the weevils begin to feed within the squares. The 
females as a result become fit to oviposit. With the squares few 
and far between, they at once scatter all over the field. I showed 
from this at that time that the only economical means of control- 
ling hibernated weevils would consist in picking the weevils oft 
the edge of the field beginning with the setting of squares, every 
day, at least while there is warm weather. This has to be kept 
up till emergence is about over, which usually takes 3 to 4 
weeks. Thus, if a female is caught on the edge, it sav r -s hunt- 
ing for her offspring, represented by about 139" infested squares, 
later on, scattered all over the field. This latter way, however, 
is the now officially approved way, approved as far as you can 
carry it out — it is all up to you. The scientists in charge are 
foxey. The correctness of the statements made by me was nev- 
er disputed by them, Nor has any member of Congress insisted 
to be shown why I should be wrong. 

In 1915 I realized that the problem of how to control the 
New Mexico range caterpiller can be sjlved by the judicious use 
of poultry, explained in detail in my Circular No. 151. 

This in turn led me to realize that while the plan ot secur- 
ing hibernated weevils as just described was a good one, it 
would often be difficult to secure the proper help to get tae de- 
sired results, and tnat poultry could be used to advantage, this 
the more as poultry could be used the year around. rake the 

*This is the average number actually found in tests 



do) 

case of the weedy peach orchard, for instance. If the weevils hi- 
bernate in the weeds, and poultn^ had the range of the orchard 
during fall and winter, the poultry will secure most of the weev- 
ils before emergence. Again, given access to the orchard and 
across the lane during spring, the} 7 Could easily see the emerged 
weevils feeding on the young cotton. Further, as squares begin 
to fall it is natural for poultry to pick on these, since they sug- 
gest a juicy grub within; they thus attack the adult, the larva 
and the pupa. This naturally keeps down the weevil and re- 
sults in increased production. This the more as poultry also con- 
trols other cotton insects. This includes the bollworm, as will 
be shown. Moreover, it will be shown how poultry can be as- 
sisted by the use of trap-plants, and how this enables the field 
to produce fully up till frost. 

The Bureau's way is quite the opposite. They emphasize 
the need of securing an early crop. "What is-needed is a varie- 
ty which will mature quickly and set a crop by a date not later 
than the middle of July. In humid regions with heavy infesta- 
tation the most productive varieties have been found to be King 
and its principle derivatives, namely, Simpkins and Broadwall. 
In recommending these varieties the Department reminds the 
planter that they produce lint of a very short staple... The vari- 
eties may safely be replaced by large-boll varieties in other re- 
gions." What other regions? Well regions not humid. This 
means chiefly West Texas, Oklahoma and North Arkansas. 
Thus all the rich lands in the humid regions are to grow the 
King type. What you want is a means of control that makes 
possible the growing of long-staple and Sea- Inland cotton where 
it was grown before the advent of the weevil. As long as you 
have not done this you have not solved the problem. If you have 
a variety that sets a crop by the middle of June, you would sim- 
ply cut the season that much shorter. By clearing the fields in 
the fall, driving the weevils away to other fields not cleared, and 
then racing along for an early crop by all means known, such as 
selecting a perfectly drained field, best of cultivation, proper fer- 
tilizer and especially an early strain of seed, you can easily out- 



(n) 

run your neighbor, as shown by me as long as 13 years ago in 
my Circular No. 31, but such a course means simply winning at 
the expense of the neighbors, because as soon as the earliest 
field becomes at all well infested, there starts an exodus of weev- 
ils bred there for nearby fields having as yet a lower infestation 
of squares. As not all lands are alike and cannot be made equal- 
ly early, the men with 'proper methods' comes out first at the ex- 
pense of the man riding a slower horse. 

The planters in a section might agree to not plant before a 
certain date, for all now realize that the earliest fields serve as a 
weevil nursery, but not all fields could be rushed along at the 
same rate. 

If the fields are kept patrolled by poultry while young, the 
weevils cannot get plentiful enough to do any appreciable dam- 
age. That poultry can secure this result, is known from what 
poultry did in at least one very similar case, the alfalfa weevil. 
Details are given on page 10 of my Circular No. 151. The Bu- 
reau of Entomology had now two years in which to make all the 
tests they wanted to satisfy themselves if benefiting the public is 
what they are after. 

After considerable fruit has set, squares become scarcer and, 
if the weevils are sufficiently numerous, as they are under the 
present official methods, infestation of bolls begins. But squares 
are preferred, because the female knows a new generation can 
be produced in them quicker than in bolls. The scarcity of 
squares thus naturally causes a constant movement in search of 
them. It is all theory what I say, is what Chief Howard tells 
members of Congress that make an honest attempt to get at the 
truth. First let him point out what is theoretical, here or any- 
where else. 

. Inasmuch as we do know that destruction of all cotton in 
the fall, following the law of self preservation, does develop a 
tendency of the weevil to subsist on and breed in plants related 
to cotton, which "is easier to' acquire than the ability to go with- 
out feeding and breeding during the absence of cotton, I had 
shown in my Circular No. 148, page 13, that, provided poultry 



(12) 

is not able, through lack of numbers or any other cause, to so 
keep down the weevil as to make the cotton bear till fiost. it will 
be unwise to cut off all of the plants when they are no longer 
producing profitably and that a small part should not be cut off. 
These plants then are to serve as traps. These plants, it was 
shown, could be rolled down so that poultry could have access 
to the tops and keep on picking the weevils off. 

Using trap-plants is the more necessary as destruction of 
all cotton plants includes also the destruction of volunteer cot- 
ton scattered all over the country, work that is no one's partic- 
ular business. Unless destroyed these plants can, and will, in 
the absence of all other cotton, attract and sustain vast numbers 
of weevils. Then again since the boll weevil has been actually 
bred on Hibiscus siiriacvs, and this plantoccurs there plentiful- 
ly, and there are numerous related plants, destruction of all of 
the plants in the field would have lost its value as a means of 
control anyway, and a supplv of trap-plants tends to keep them 
to cotton, cheir original and preferred food. 

A better way of concentrating the weevils was pointed out, 
however, in my Circular No. 149. This consisted in planting 
a small patch of cotton very late, say in Julv, for no other pur- 
pose than providing an abundance of squares in the fall. Any 
kind of seed, except a late variety, will do. Weeds in the rows 
are kept down by one or more harrowings before, and possibly 
immediately after, the plants are up: there is no thinning or hand 
weeding ot the rows: the patch is cultivated as usual and should 
be sown as a crop of vetches at the last cultivation. Thus there 
is very little expense. This patch will then attract the weevils, 
since the females then do a great deal of flying in an attempt to 
place their 139 eggs on the average, to as good advantage as 
possible. And poultry can easily find them there. Feeding a 
little grain there daily would cause poultry to stav there by 
preference. Where practicable these patches might be located 
within a poultry-tight fence. Doing this will give positive evi- 
dence what value there is to these trap patches. This then results 
in the cotton-field keeping on bearing till frost. Thus there is 



(13) 

done away with the danger of complicating- matters by having 
the boll weevil become accustomed to other food plants besides 
cotton. 

In an exceptionally dry season, cotton planted thus late 
might not sprout. In that case some rows of the old plants 
might be cut back so as to produce a abundance of squares. 
These plants would have to be rolled down to bring the weevils 
within reach of poultry. 

Such trap-plants, it was pointed out, would of course be 
preferred to the older plants by many other insects, and it was 
shown this is of special importance in the case of the boll worm. 

In my Circular No. 150, p. 9, I quoted the Bureau from 
Farmers' Bulletin No. 290, p. 30 as saying: "Several instances 
have come under the writer's observation in which cotton adja- 
cent to barns, where chickens, turkeys and guineas were kept 
was practically free from bollworms, while at some distance out 
in the fields the injury was quite severe." 

In the cases in question poultry, apparently, was not present 
in sufficient numbers, or was not used to proper advantage. A 
little grain scattered over the parts not kept clear would proba- 
bly have induced the poultr} r to extend its range of feeding to 
these points. 

Such trappatches of cotton with an abundance of squares 
make the most favorable oviposition material then available for 
the bollworm. What specimens final^ succeed in entering hi- 
bernation do so by pupating about 2 inches below the surface of 
the ground. As stated these patches should have been sown to % 
vetches at the last cultivation. There is no hurry to destroy 
these plants after having been killed by frost. Besides bollworm 
pupa, this patch is apt to harbor boll weevils, and other insects. 
Because of this variety of insects, the patch should be plowed 
down when emergence of weevils begins. 

In the North a little patch of corn sown in August offers the 
very finest oviposition material for the hibernating brood. This 
corn need not go to waste. It may be pastured off, or hogged 



(h) 

down at the approach of frost. This patch must be plowed down 
in the North early in Ma} 7 to prevent any pupa in the ground to 
escape as adults. 

It will readily be seen that by providing a trap patch of 
young cotton to concentrate the last generation of the boll wee- 
vils, and also of the bollworm and many other cotton insects, 
and having poultry at work, there is no good reason why the 
cottonfields should not produce up till frost. In any case the 
plants in the field are to be cut off with the V stalk cutter as 
soon as production is practically at an end. There is no need to 
burn these plants, since most it not all weevils that may vet em- 
erge from squares and bolls on the cut off plants would find their 
way to the trappatch of late planted cotton. The cotton field 
thus is turned into a pasture within a few weeks after the cutting 
off of the plants. These plants left to rot, become overgrown 
by the vetches, and are buried in the early spring evenly and 
completely by the use of a heavy chain in connection with the 
plow. 

After there is no more cotton, poultry can hunt for weevils 
and insect in general in the many places that may serve as hi- 
bernating quarters. None of these should bd burned over. 

There has recently appeared U. S. Dept. of Agr. Bulletin 
No. 564, giving the results of tests on the collection of weevils 
and infested squares as a means of control of the cotton boll 
weevil in the Mississippi Delta. In substance, as there given, 
the result comes to this: ...It seems to the writers that in a 
year of light infestation a slight degree of benefit may be secured 
from the picking operations, but that in a year of average or 
heavy infestation this benefit is completely lost..." {p. 44). It 
is shown there at length ho\y utterly impossible it is on the aver- 
age to secure the labor necessary to do the picking, or, to put it 
another way, if other crops are neglected because of this pick- 
ing, tne loss to the crop per da> r per man is given as amounting 
to $5.11. Thus we now have radically different figures from 
what the U. S. Entomologist has dished up some years ago when 
he claimed, tests had shown a profit of $3.22 per acre, implying 



(is) 

then that labor and conditions could be generally secured to get 
such results. 

Moreover, The discovery of the injurious effect of the use 
of bag and hoop (collection of weevils and infested squares) on 
the plant is of great importance the studies... have shown defi- 
nitely that the use of this semi-mechanical picker cannot be rec- 
ommended," (p. 50). 

As to mechanical pickers: ''The failure of the mechanical 
picker to give satisfactory results is very discouraging... This 
picker was so injurious to the plants that it actually reduced the 
crop considerably," (p. 51). 

Then why not make a judicious use of poultry? Under date 
of Feb. 28, 1917 the Secretary of Agriculture wrote to Hon. 
John E. Raker, who made an attempt to get at the truth, as fol- 
lows as regards the use of poultry and a trappatch, described in 
this Circular, and originally presented to him in my Circulars No. 

147 to 150: "...Mr. Reinlein's suggestion is that chickens be 
provided in sufficient numbers to destroy all or most of the wee- 
vils as soon as they make their way into the fields." 

The fact is, when in my Circular No. 147, 1915, I pointed 
to the use of poultry as a means of controlling the boll weevil for 
the first time, I showed its use to be possible not only during the 
period of emergence, but also on fallen squares, and as for con- 
trol after the plants were cut off, I stated on page 23: "...the 
plants cut off with the stalk cutter furnish subsistence for wee- 
vils till dry, and the weevils can be picked off meanwhile by the 
use of poultry." 

This method was improved by showing in my Circular No. 

148 that a few rows might be left standing as this then will hold 
the weevils to their original and preferred tood plant, These trap 
rows, by being rolled down, would then attract weevils till killed 
by frost, and at the same time would carry the weevils low enough 
to be reached by poultry. Finally, in my Circular No. 150 I 
showed that by growing a trappatch of late planted cotton, the 
weevils are concentrated there during all of late summer and fall. 



U6) 

All this the Secretary's humbugologist deliberately ignores, 
and specifically claims all this and certain other matters relating 
to the range caterpillar and the Argentine ant, discussed on 
pages 15 to 22 of my Circular No. 151 to be impractical, but, as 
always in the past, carefully refrains from making any attempt 
to show why this should be so. 

As far back as my Circular No. 127, 1912, I had shown that 
once you fail to secure the weevils at the edge of the field as they 
emerge from hibernating quarters outside of the field, and before 
they begin to breed, control becomes impossible, because not 
only will each female infest on the average 139 squares, but 
these squares will also be scattered all over the field, and more- 
over before you can find any infested squares you have to stand 
by for two weeks or more allowing the weevils unhindered en- 
trance, thus increasing the work hopelessly. 

It will thus be seen the Bureau of Etomology has really no 
tangible means of controlling the boll weevil, first, because de- 
struction of the plants in the fall by plowing out is too slow and 
the weevil is learning to adapt itself to absence of cotton, both 
by learning to go. without any food, and by learning to feed and 
breed in plants other than cotton, and, second, because col- 
lecting weevils and fallen squares has been shown to be entirel}^ 
impracticable. Early planting and use of early varieties can 
make a good showing only in individual cases, because if uni- 
versally practiced it will enable the weevils in all of the fields to 
start breeding that much earlier. That is, many females that 
would otherwise die before they could oviposit, will thus become 
enabled to oviposit, and later emerging ones will find an abun- 
dance of squares, where otherwise the} r would find a scarcity; 
this then accelerates ovoposition. 

The Chairmen of the Congressional Committees on Agricul- 
ture, Senator Thomas P. Gore and Representative Asbury F. 
Lever, are to blame for permitting the Bureau to dodge the is- 
sue from year to year. 

Because of this, upon the issuance of my Circular No. 151, 
I undertook to see what could be done to interest the officials in 



(i7) 

charge of agriculture in the States that are chiefly affected by the 
control of the insects there discussed. 

In Circular No. 151 I purposly went minute^ into detail 
in regard to the use of poultry as a means of controlling the New 
Mexico range caterpiller, because there is nothing complicated 
either about the problem or the means of control advocated by 
me, I made every effort to get Representative W. B. Walton 
of New Mexico to ask the U. S. Entomologist to define his po- 
sition. Mr. Walton took no action of any kind. Both of the 
U. S, Senators were posted. Senator A. B. Fall made no re- 
ply. Senator A. A. Jones twice promised to look into this mat- 
ter. 

I had tried to interest the State Officials as early as I had 
worked out the system of control in my Circular No. 146, 1915, 
and they were wanted to render an opinion on it and test it out to 
their own satisfaction. 

This insect as egg, larva, pupa and moth is accessible to 
poultry the year around, and is fit food for poultry except as 
more than half grown caterpillar. The Bureau of Entomology 
on the other hand has no means of control, except what may be 
possible by fostering parasitic and predaceous insects. As this 
insect is now also attacking cultivated grasses and grains, it is 
obvious that control by parasitic and predaceous insects alone is 
entirely inadequate, even when the pest is comparatively scarce 
on the range. 

In New Mexico the Director of the Experiment Station is in 
charge of agricultural matters. When addressed he expressed 
himself favorably toward having the matter fully discussed by 
the State Entomologist. As this was not done, however, I call- 
ed his attention to it. There then came a reply by the State En- 
tomologist, at least touching upon a few things connected with 
the matter and the sum of all was this: 'T regard the^govern- 
ment's method of investigation" [relying on parasites] "as more 
natural and more productive of permanent results than is your 
method." 



(i8) 

Yes, that method must be regarded as more natural and 
more productive of permanent results, just as the moon is more 
natural and more productive of permanent results as a lantern 
than is any other means of lighting during the night, but men 
find it necessary to employ other means in addition to get light 
when and where it is wanted. 

The natural enemies often fail, in fact, the Government 
gives it as its belief that this is what caused the insect to become 
prominent as a pest; and for this very reason, since the Govern- 
ment wants to humbug the people by telling the people lies, 
claiming my plan consists in having the caterpillars eaten by 
turkeys, the State Entomologist can be expected to state his 
side. As it is, if a rancher or farmer has his ranch or farm 
threatened by the caterpillars, as far as the State Entomologist 
is concerned, there is no help; whereas if poultry had had the 
run about the range, they would have minimized the eggs, and 
minimized the young caterpillars. Further, they would the fall 
before have minimized the pupae and minimized the moths. Thus 
the pest could not become greatly injurious to crops. That this 
is so was shown at lengtn in my Circular No. 151 from official 
evidence referring to feeding habits of wild birds and of poultry 
in regard to insects in general, and the gipsy- and browntail- 
moths, in their various stages, in particular. 

These last two pests, it is shown there at length, when tak- 
en as forest pests, are beyond any control as far as means ad- 
vocated by the Bureau of Entomology are concerned. The pro- 
posed plan of changing the deciduous woods as far as practica- 
ble to conifers encounters, admitedly, a serious difficulty because 
of probable attacks by the white-pine blister rust; and then I had 
shown on pages 35 to 38 of my Circular No. 151, there is now 
present the European pine shoot moth, which destroys the apical 
bud, causing crooked pines. The remedy the Bureau advocates 
is 140 years old, and consists in removing the infested apical 
shoots. The remedy I pointed out as far back as in 1915 consists 
in protecting the apical bud by an application of semi-liquid clay 
before the beginning of the ovipositing period. The U. S. En- 



(19) 

tomologist was all along urged to show what might be wrong or 
impracticable about this method, but he all along maintained ab- 
solute silence. 

There has recently appeared Farmers' Bulletin No. 845: 
The gipsymoth and the brovvntail moth, and their control. On 
page 1 are shown about 50 female gipsy moths depositing eggs 
on a tree trunk. Thus here you see moths and eggs in quantity 
where they would be within reach of poultry. Probably 12/^% 
of all the eggs are thus oviposited. Add to this other places 
within reach of poultry, such as stone walls and low vegetation, 
and we have probably a total of 25% within reach of poultry, 
although a fourth of these are apt to be deposited out of sight. 

On page 24 you read: "...planting of white pine might be 
done to advantage, but... the question... must be decided by the 
owner..." and "The presence of., white pine blicterrust.. should 
receive due consideration..." The presence of the European 
pineshoot moth is ignored. Thus all the Bureau's advice just 
comes to this: You pay your money and take your choice. 

On page 31 of my Circular No. 151 I had shown from Year- 
book Separated No. 700 that turkeys greatly relish acorns and 
that where these are plentiful but little grain need be used for 
fattening them in the fall. This probably also holds good with 
chickens. Now, oaks are very plentiful in the territory infested 
by the gipsy- and browntail moth, and as they are officially ad- 
mitted to eat moths in common with many birds much smaller, 
they can be profitably used to at least help to control the gipsy 
moth. 

Mr. S. A. Weiant, Scientific Assistant in Poultry Husband- 
ry, who wrote Separate No. 100 under date of January 9, in re- 
gard to my inquiry, mentions in addition as available nuts, 
beechnuts, chestnuts and pine nuts, thus showing that the woods 
offer rich feeding ground. 

Elimination of oak, scrubapple and wild cherry is specifical- 
ly recommended on page 24 of No. 845 as greatly assisting in 
reducing the number of browntail moths. But the insect can sub- 
sist admittedly on almost anything except conifers. 



Uo) 

The Bureau of Biological Survey publishes literature on 
how to attract birds, and lays special stress on the value of fruit 
bearing shrubs and trees, while the Bureau of Entomology urg- 
es their eradication, for they are host-plants to practically all 
the insects and fungi that attack the cultivated trees and shrubs. 
Wild birds cannot be strictly controlled, nor can they be owned, 
but poultry can be controlled and owned. Nutbearing trees and 
shrubs, wild, and planted and grafted, are one of the very best 
plants to use to clothe sidehiJls with to prevent erosion. These 
nutbearing trees, in common with other vegetation, are affected 
by insects and fungi, their greatest enemies being weevils. All 
these weevils pass the winter as larva in the ground. These larvae 
in the fall and spring are near the surface and can be found by 
poultry. Hogs can admittedly be fattened by being given access 
to eat up the nuts that are not gathered or are wormy, 

It cannot be denied that it is in accordance with the law of 
nature that all lands not fit for agricultural purposes should be 
kept in timber of whatever kind best succeeds, in a given locali- 
ty, and that the steeper the slopes the more necessary it is that 
the undergrowth and ground covering should be interferred with 
as little as possible. Thus the woods will harbor many plants 
that would, for instance, sustain the apple maggot. These plants 
would include haws, crab-apples, huckleberries and blueberries. 
Under primitive conditions the fruits of these plants are eaten 
by bovines and other animals, and to avoid having them serve 
as sources of infestation to cultivated plants, it is clear that cat- 
tle, horses, hogs and sheep should have access to eat the fruits. 
Poultry will be of benefit chiefly by securing larva and pupa 
from the ground, the period extends for about nine months in the 
year. 

Take another case: The larch sawfly does often very great 
damage in north-eastern New England, The Bureau of Entomol- 
ogy has no means of control to offer. The insect passes the win- 
ter as pupa inside of a cocoon in the rubbish beneath the trees, 
during 10 months out of 12. I had shown in mv Circular No. 



(21 

140, pp 16 and 17, that poultry in large numbers, and giving 
them the run under supervision of man over the tracts thus af- 
fected, solves the problem. Besides when plentiful these cater- 
pillars crawl in great numbers on the ground, and make fit food 
for poultry, being devoid of poisonous hairs. 

A similar case of importance: The grape berrymoth passes 
the winter as pupa in a cocoon, usually spun on a grape leaf du- 
ring October. These leaves, normally, are blown together du- 
ring the winter in sheets, and there hibernation takes place. 
What is needed, clearly, is to give poultry access to these leaves. 

Preserving as far as practicable the natural undergrowth 
everywhere is necessary to secure the more nearly even flow of 
rivers, through holding the rainfall instead of having the water 
rush off to the sea, filling up the rivers with sediment at one 
time, and failing to have the rivers give the flow they are nor- 
mally capable of at other times. 

Further: The more vegetable matter is thus allowed to ac- 
cumulate on non-agricultural lands, the less will there be vege- 
gation that will dry up during the late summer and fall, conse- 
quently the less will be the danger from fire. 

Still another thing: Some insects are held more in check by 
fungus diseases than by parasites. These fungi do not develop 
in the absence of moisture. There is good reason to believe that 
the range caterpillar is normally kept in check more by fungus 
disease than by parasites, for as it feeds on pr near the ground, 
fungus disease developing during a spell of hot, moist, weather, 
has a specially good chance to get a hold. However it is well 
known that the range has been kept overstocked for years. Thus 
it is easy to see that absence of enough vegetation to hold as 
near as feasible what precipitation there occurs — and it occurs 
there mostly in the form of sudden heavy local downpours — fail- 
ed to provide the conditions necessary for the developement of 
the fungus. These conditions require the presence of a certain 
amount of humus. Thus it is highly probable that the Ento- 
mologist and his trained scientific Staff, and also the New Mexi- 



(22) 

co State Entomologist, are altogether watching the wrong hole 
as far as natural agencies of control are concerned. 

What can be done? On the open range nothing can be 
done, unless laws are enacted to enable the stockmen to fence 
the land popularly consideded to be each man's range — the land 
half the distance from each man's watering place to that of his 
neighbor's. This matter is very ably discussed in U. S. Dept. 
Agr. Bulletin No. 211: Factors affecting range management in 
New Mexico. The greatest stress is laid on the necessity of a- 
voiding erosion, and the chief remedy pointed out is avoiding 
close grazing. 

Just for contrast how is this: "Under certain favorable 
circumstances the winter burning of restricted areas has proved 
of great benefit in destroying the, over-wintering egg clusters. 
Cultivated areas usually may be protected by winter-burning the 
surrounding egg-bearing grass, weeds or other vegetation. How- 
ever such burning destroys the grass crop for that year..." (U. 
S. Dept. of Agr. Bulletin No. 443, p. 11.) 

Avoiding close grazing, then, produces conditions more 
suitable for the developement of fungus disease in summers of 
more than normal rainfall. Overstocking has been going on for 
many years. If the range caterpillar has become plentiful be- 
cause of the absence of insect parasites, as is officially claimed, 
overstocking would seem to have been the cause. If so, there 
then is no good reason to expect that breeding parasites wonld 
be of benefit as long as close grazing is not avoided. 

Of the introduced natural enemies 3 kinds of large ground 
beetles (calosomas) are considered to be among the most impor- 
tant. As far back as 1915 in my Circular No. 147, p, 16, I had 
quoted evidence from U. S, Dept, of Agr. Bulletin No. 250, The 
Calosoma sycopkanta in New England, and showed that skunks, 
raccoons and foxes destroy large numbers of the beetles before 
they can emerge from the ground and climb up the trees and 
that, because of this, they are kept rather scarce even in wood- 
lands, where after emergence they are out of reach of ground 



(2 3 ) 

inhabiting vertebrates. On the range this is not the case, hence 
this beetle has there not the slightest chance to become a factor 
in keeping down the range caterpillar, 

Because of this, it was shown that in making systematic 
use ol poultry for control the thing to do is to trap or shoot the 
skunks and other predatory animals, bringing in at the big pri- 
ces paid for good furs considerable money, and at the same time 
this serves to protect the larger stock, especially sheep. This 
can be easily done because the poultry is to be corralled at night 
within a moveable woven wire fence, and the predatory animals 
will nose around outside. 

Copies of my Circular No. 151 were sent to the State Ento- 
mologist of four of the New England states most affected. I 
also made other efforts to get officials of these states to act. On- 
ly one of them made any reply. He said: "The possible bene- 
efit that might arise from the use of poultry for a means of des- 
troying gipsy moth eggs is problematical..." Exactly. The at- 
tention of the Bureau of Entomology was called to this in 1915, 
and instead of carrying on tests, they now claim I am wrong 
on this and everything else. Since about 20% of the eggs are 
within reach and about 75% of these are within plain view of 
poultry, and these are present at a time, during the late fall, 
winter and early spring, wnile animal food is scarce, poultry 
will naturally feed heavily on these. Then since the caterpillars, 
especially while young, frequently lower themselves it was 
shown, they thus also often come within reach of poultry. To 
what extent they then thus can destroy the pest is thus also left 
to be problematical, this while Congress is appropriating spe- 
cial funds for just this purpose. 

The gipsy moth caterpillar exists in six stages, since it molts 
five times. The several lengths are %, H, % 1^, 1^,2 5-16 
inches. It takes about 50 of the third stage caterpillars to equal 
the bulk of of one specimen of the sixth stage. The New Mexi- 
co range caterpillar passes through the same stages, but length 



(24) 

and hulk is materially greater. Chickens having the run ot 
woods can thus destroy vast numbers of young gipsy moth cat- 
erpillars without even feeling satisfied, and that, too, without 
any injurious effect on their health. It is the same with the 
range caterpillar. 

On pages 32 to 35 of my Circular No. 151 I described what 
is an easy and sure means of controlling the sugar cane borer 
moth. Since the Bureau of Entomology would not speak I tri- 
ed to get the Louisana Sugar Experiment Station to state its 
position. They did nothing of the kind. 

The means outlined rests upon the fact that the borer pre- 
fers young corn for breeding, and also takes advantage ot the 
fact that the moths hang on the plants during the day, thus en- 
abling poultry to secure at least part of them. Trap patches of 
young corn are provided during the whole season especially in 
late summer and fall to attract and hold the last brood, which 
upon going to hibernate in the ground is then destroyed by 
plowing. This plan not only protects the cane, but also makes 
possible the growing of an adaquate supply of corn on a sugar 
cane plantation. . 

As cane supports the mealy bug, and as the presence of the 
Argentine ant results in an estimated five-fold increase of the 
pest, I had asked also the Station what they think of my plan of 
using poultry to control this pest by scratching up the shallow 
nests, as discussed on pages 19 and 20 of my Circular No. 151. 
They did not reply. 

With the boll weevil now covering most of the South Atlan- 
tic States, territory that used to ^row much long staple and Sea 
Island cotton, and the Argentine ant getting a good foot-hold 
there also, I wanted to see what the State Officials ot the Gulf- 
and South Atlantic States would do when shown the facts as giv- 
en in my Circular Xo. 151, Only two made any reply at all. 
While the two replies in question did not go into any details, 
they at least showed that the offices they emulated from are oc- 



(2 5 ) 

cupied by men and not by scared rats. 

How is this for a straightforward reply: "Novembers, 

1917 — will state that it has never been the policy of this 
department to participate in controversies that do not con- 
cern us. We are not in any way interested in your contro- 
versy with the U. S. Bureau of Entomology. The men who have 
conducted experiments on the boll weevil and other insects, for 
the Bureau, are among the most able men in this line of work 
to be found in this country, and we have no reason to disagree 
with them in recommendations which they have made as results 
of their investigations .., State Entomologist." 

This man is at least candid. But have his Commissioner of 
Agriculture ask him whether the U. S. Bureau of Entomology 
has made any recommendations satisfactory or otherwise, to con- 
trol the Argentine ant at large, and he has to admit they have 
nothing of. the kind, a matter discussed on pages 19 and 20 of 
my Circular No. 151. Ask this man whether the means of con- 
trolling the boll weevil as advocated by the Bureau are all that 
can be desired and he has to admit that a really satisfactory 
means of control must make it easily practicable to utilize the 
whole season all over a given region. The people of his state are 
manifestly agreed that he should be interested in these things. 
His ability to serve his people is at present confined to stating 
Lis view ot the merits or demerits of the case, so that the repre- 
sentatives of the people of his Slate in Congress may know the 
reason. Claiming to have no reason to disagree with the Bureau 
implies a condemnation of my method, and an endorsement of 
tie Bureau's method, and calls for an explanation why mv meth- 
tnod should be condemned. And failure to make such an expla- 
nation in the rirst place, implies he cannot make any. 

The other reply came from the State Horticulturist of an 
adjoining state. He stated after having a copy of my Circular No. 
151 for a day, that he finds it very interesting, but is unable to 
get the proper view point, because he does not know who I am 
and whv I write these circulars. Thus here, for once, vou have 



(26; 

an unspoiled, guileless soul to start with. 

He was told, in essence, that the U. S. Bureau of Entomol- 
ogy does not hold a corner on brains, that to present my case 
and protect myself I have to use copyrighted books; that as 
long as I do not get fair play the matter keeps out of general 
circulation; thus that, for instance, the cotton planters have to 
use the method of controlling the boll weevil the Bureau describ- 
es and claims to be good, when it is actually worthless, and 
when there can be made available one that is good, and that to 
get fair play I want to find out whether the State Entomologists 
are willing to do the right thing by their states and define their 
position. He was told his State Entomologist, through his for 
mer connection with the Bureau of Entomology in boll weevil ii.- 
vestigations, knows me well enough for all practical purposes, 
and is an ideal man to point out any sore spots that might exist 
on the method of boll weevil control, as described in my Circu- 
lar No. 151. There was no further reply. Evidently his State 
Entomologist succeeded in prevailing upon him to do nothing in 
the way of stepping on Chief Howard's corns. 

What is known as white pine blister rust has been described 
in Farmer's Bulletin No. 742, issued June 9, 1916. It is claim- 
ed there that the pines sutler from a rust, and that to prevent 
that rust upon pines, it is necessary to destroy all currants and 
gooseberries — wild and cultivated. 

I shall show that the pines suffer from a cankerous disease, 
and that what is known as rust on the pines is the hibernating 
form of a fungus disease affecting currants and gooseberries, 
and this rust, on pines, affects merely decaying tissue, and does, 
therefore, no damage to pines, and destruction of the currants 
and gooseberries would not in any way stop the caiiKerous dis- 
ease; shall show it all, too, trom the statements oi the author, 
Mr. Perley Spaulding, Forest Pathologist. 

According to Mr. Spaulding infection of the pines takes 
place through what is known as teliospores, produced in late 
summer and fall upon currants and gooseberries, f hese "...fal.- 



(2 7 ) 

ing upon bark of suitable age on white pine, may in turn germi- 
nate, penetrate the bark and grow in the inner layers during the 
incubation period. .c" 

I shall show that the "suitable age" has nothing to do with 
the germination of these teliospores, but that the cankerous dis- 
ease requires for developement the paits on pines that are of 
suitable age, and that these teliospores cannot germinate upon, 
and penetrate, the bark of healthy pine that is suitable for the 
development of the cankerous disease. 

"A period of incubation follows the infection of white pines. 
This period may vary from less than one year to six or more 
years, [p. n] — Then the bark begins to swell at the point of 
infection. ..,the parasite pushes forth, through tiny openings in 
the bark, small drops of a clear, sweet tasting fluid. This is not 
pitch. In it, if examined by a microscope, immense numbers of 
tiny spore bodies. These may be found early in the spring before 
the formation of the blisters described below, or they may occur 
apparently at almost any season in late summer and fall. What 
the function of these tiny spore bodies may be, nobody knows. 
They occur in a considerable number of closely related parasites, 
but they are not known to reproduce the disease in any way. 
They are simply indicators of the disease. They are known as 
pycnospores. Shortly after the pycnospores are produced, from 
the latter part of April until the middle of June, the real fruiting 
bodies push their way through the swollen tissues of the bark... 

known as aeciospores or Peridermium spores If one of these 

falls upon a leaf of a currant or gooseberry it is able to attack 

that leaf These new spores... are called uredospores a new 

generation of uredospores being produced every two weeks.'... 
From the latter part of July until the fall of the leaves. Still 
another form of fruiting body and of spores is produced... These 
are known as teliospores.., in order to carry on the disease they 
must attack the bark of young white pine or young parts of old 

while pine This infection of the pine bark must take place in 

the late summer and fall. If the parasite finds conditions very fa- 



(28) 

vorable, it may produce the sweetish drops of liquid with the 
pycnospores early the next spring and shortly after that it may 
produce the blisters containing the Peridermium spores Be- 
cause of the fact that the peridermium spores produced upon pine 
cannot infect pine and that the teliospores produced upon cur- 
rants cannot infect currants, we immediately perceive that if the 
two sets of host plants are separated widely enough so that the 
spores produced upon one cannot reach the other, the disease 
cannot spread." (p. 14). 

Wrong. The teliospores germinate only on parts of pines 
previously diseased, and which are producing the pycnidial 
drops. These teleospores penetrate the diseased bark and in the 
spring produce the Peridermium spores, and nothing else. That 
they do not produce the pycnospores is proven by the fact that 
the pynidial drops ''may occur apparently at almost any season 
in late summer and fall," because there are then no teliospores 
to produce them. To claim that the pycnidal drops containing 
the pycnospores are simply indicators of the disease, is little 
short of absurd. We know that in the case of the pearhiight 
there are similar exudations and the disease is spread by insects 
feeding on them and infecting other trees. 

We have to do in th s case with a disease of pines, very 
much what pearblight is to pears. The disease is spread by in- 
sects—wasps, bees, flies etc., in the case of the pearblight — car- 
rying the so called pycnospores to parts of pines susceptible to 
attack. If all the currants and gooseberries were eradicated — 
and this is the means of control proposed — there would be no 
uredospores to produce teliospores to germinate on diseased parts 
of pines and produce peridermium spores in the spring, but the 
disease that is really killing the pines is then there as before. 

What can be done? The fungus. disease on currants can eas- 
iest be kept down by an occasional slight licking of the undtr 
side of the leaves with a hot air blast torch, a suitable type of 
which is shown on last page. This was pointed out by me as tar 
back as 1898, but the Bureau of Plant Industry never made any 
tests to satisfy themselves. 



(2 9 ) 

What actually kills the pines is a bacterial or cankerous 
disease, similar to pearblight. As far back as 1903 I had called 
the attention of the Bureau of Plant Industry to the possible use 
of heat from a hot airblast torch, through repeated slight lick- 
ings, upon these exudations. They said, it might be of some 
value, but nothing was done to test it out. 

These pycnospores are not spores at all, but are microbes, 
and the sweet tasting fluid they are in serves to attract animal 
life to carry the disease to other plants, same as in the case of 
the pearblight, as will be shown. 

On page 25 of my Circular No. 139, 1913, I described what 
I considered a much better method, in fact, I propose to show 
that it is far the best thing that can be used of anything now 
known. I give the original description in full. 

"If the use of a torch should be shown to be of no value in 
this case, I would consider that smearing the exudations 
over with some such matter as air slacked lime, or a mixt- 
ure of it with clay, carbonated or otherwise, made strongly 
disinfecting, or not, as tests may prove to be best, applied 
dry, or probably more successfully in paste form with a 
plasterer's trowel, would permit the tree to throw off mat- 
ter it wants to throw off, but would not permit the insects 
to have access to it. Of course, this paste, after getting 
dry, is quite liable to crack, due to evaporation as well as 
due to the growth of the tree, but thesecracks it should be 
easy to All up by dashing with a paste brush or a suitable 
broom some more of the same stuff, in more liquid form, ov- 
er the stuff already on To thus prevent pear blight, or 
what is also called fire blight, and control diseases of simi- 
lar nature, work on covering up the exudations or the spots 
where thev are breaking out must naturally be prompt for 
best results. Possibly a semi-liquid smear, applied with a 
paste brush, will prove to be best." 

According to the Secretary of Agriculture, that, with all else 
I have pointed out, is theory, and all wrong. Let them examine 
the evidence following and show what is wrong: Pear blight "at- 
tacks and rapidly kills the blossoms, young fruit, and new twig 
growth, aud runs down in the living bark to the large limbs and 



(3o) 

thence to the trunk...." (Yearbook U. S. A, 1905, P- 295.) 
'"Pear blight varies in severity... the microbes travel about... 
notwithstanding the fact that they are surrounded and held to- 
gether and to the tree by sticky and gummy substances..," ( p. 
290) The pear blight microbe is a very delicate organism and 
cannot withstand drying for any length of time..." (p. 297) In 
early spring it spreads rapidly and the gum is exuded copio- 
usly from various points in the bark and runs down the tree in 
a long line. Bees, wasps and flies are attracted to this gum and 
undoubtedly carry the microbes to the blossoms.., (p. 298) The 
kev to the whole situation is found in those cases of active blight 
[comparatively few] which hold ever winter If they can be found 
and destroyed the pear blight question will be solved.." [p 298] 
''The only really satisfactory method of controlling pear blight., 
is... by cutting out and burning every particle of blight when 
the trees are dormant, [p. 299].. in the orchard or within a half 
mile or so from it. Every tree of the pome family [apple, pear, 
quince, crabapple, mountain ash, serviceberry and haws] 
should be examined for this purpose, the blight being the same 
in all..." [p.. 300.] 

This cutting out is too severe a measure. The cases of blight 
that hold over winter are usually found on big limbs or on the 
trunk of the tree. To cut them out there involves making a 
dangerous wound, inviting attack by fungi and by insects. In 
addition this work of cutting and burning is very slow. If cut- 
ting be practiced, the health of the tree requires that the great 
wounds thus caused be protected, involving much time and ex- 
pense. 

It is obvious that it is as safe to say that the key to con- 
trol consists in rendering the exudations in the spring harmless, 
since they, admittedly, contain the microbes. In an orchard the 



(30 

plan shown by me would consist in covering the exudations with 
some suitable smear to absorbe the moisture, thus both killing 
the microbes and keeping off the carriers of the disease. Merely 
digging up some soil or a clump of grass and rubbing over the 
places where the exudations occur, beginning when they are a- 
bout to occur, and going over the trees every few days, to sup- 
plement this where necessary should be all that is needed. This 
course will then enable the tree to heal the canker over and in- 
cidentally to keep out insects and fungi. This would seem to 
be the only feasible course on wild trees. These moreover are 
usually not on the orchardist's land. 

It will be seen that this course would also fit a similar bac- 
terial disease of the plum and related stone fruits. 

I do not consider that this course is feasible on white pine 
trees, covering forest lands. I consider that the most feasible 
course consists in taking a little white pine- or other handy ever- 
green branch and slap this about the infested parts of pines and 
do this while the pycnidial drops are produced, especially in the 
spring. It would seem certain that this causes the pycnidial 
drops to dry up, thus killing the microbes they contain. About 
the best thing to do is for the operator to carry a brush hook, 
since he may have to hew his way to where he wants to go. He 
thus also has a weapon in case he encounters a dangerous ani- 
mal. 

In 1916 this disease was known to be present in New Hamp- 
shire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York and 
Pennsylvania. It had also been found previously in New Jer- 
sey, Ohio and Indiana. Probably the trees known to be infect- 
ed were there destroyed and the disease was considered to have 
been exterminated. "Imported white pines of suspicious origin 
are known to have been shipped as far west as Illinois and Min- 
nesota, but not beyond the natural range of the eastern white 
pine." What a nice little job it would be to grub out all the cur- 
rants and gooseberries west to Minnesota as a matter of suppos- 
ed insurance and precaution! "The white pine, in many sections 



<32) 

at least, is much the most valuable tree now available for future 
forests. Its loss would be a real catastrophe, for no other tree 
can take its place." (Bull. No. 742, p. 6) 

Which shows that public interest requires that I be given a 
square deal, have the Department of Agriculture admit that I 
am right, or else show what is wrong. 

Using a hot air blast torch to control rust on currants and 
gooseberries is only one of the man} 7 uses to which heat thus 
generated can be put, described at length in my Circulars No. 
130 to 147. For instance, the Eastern States are now becoming 
heavily infested by the pearthrips. I had shown to the Bureau 
of Entomology in my Circular No. 147 that torches of any type 
needed can be readily constructed, and that heat applied while 
the pearthrips are in the larval stage will cause them to drop, 
and they can then be killed by applying more heat to the ground. 
Where the insects do not drop, as is the case with scales and 
lice, repeated slight swift lickings will keep them down, and at 
far less cost than any other known means. This also always de- 
stroys the spores of fungi that are present. I had also shown 
in my Circulars No. 139 to 147 how insects can be trapped in 
large numbers with the type of torch shown, properly fitted up. 
For instance, while nutweevils spend the winter in the ground. 
and should be kept down by poultry and hogs, adults might ap- 
pear in alarming numbers. Practically all these fly to lights and 
could be trapped. The pine weevil, which eats out the apical 
shoot, is a similar case 

In my Circulars No. 148 to 151 purposly very little has been 
said about this use of a torch as a trap, or about a still better 
and much needed system of trapping I could describe. There is 
nothing for me in any mechanical device as long as the the U. 
S. Entomologist is permitted to claim I am wrong on every point 
without being compelled to show where the wrong comes in. 

So beginning with Circular No. 148 I began to work out a 
detailed system of control for insects where no apparatus is 
needed. These include the range caterpillar, the boll weevil, 



(33*) 

the bolhvorm, the Argentine ant and the gipsy- and browntail 
moths, taken as farm and forest pests. 

The range caterpillar, for instance, does most of its damage 
within North-Eastern New Mexico. Thus here we have a more 
or less localized trouble. If it is not feasible to interest the State 
Authorities, the Members of Congress and the People, I simply 
bide my time. I tried to get Mr. Wildermuth, who wrote U. S. 
D. A. Bullentin No. 443, treating on the range caterpillar, to 
state his side. There was no reply. 

Texas is now up against a similar proposition. Newspaper 
reports have announced the discovery of the pink bolhvorm in 5 
counties about Galveston, claimed to have come from the Lagu- 
na district in Mexico. "Congress appropriated $250,000 for the 
fight and the State of Texas also put up money. The next step 
will probably be the creation of a wide zone in Texas where cul- 
tivation of cotton will be forbidden for a number of years." 

Under date of Aug. 7, 1914, the Department of Agriculture 
issued a Circular giving general information about the pink boll 
worm, but refrained from suggesting any means of control. Ac- 
cording to that Circular the pink bolhvorm cannot be starved 
out through failure to plant cotton. On page five of it you can 
read: "Occasionally the pink bolhvorm appears to attack other 
plants" (than cotton)... 

I tried to learn through the Bureau of Plant Industry what 
plants we might have in this country closely related to these food 
plants. My request was referred to the Bureau of Entomology 
and Chief Howard stated: "The records which you mention of 
other food plants of the pink bolhvorm have been proven by re- 
cent investigation to be erroneous. The only normal food of the 
worm is cotton. " 

That is, cotton, as far as is known. If so, it is theoreti- 
cally possible to stamp the insect out by growing no cotton in 
the infested area. Anyway, adopting the use of poultry and of 
trap-patches for the control of the boll weevil and the bolhvorm 
outside of this area is the best precautionary measure now known 



*(34) 

against the spread of this insect should it occur beyond what is 
believed to be the infested area. 

From what has been published on the life history of this in- 
sect it may be assumed it has at least three generations a year. 
"First a considerable number of squares and bolls are so injur- 
ed that they fall to the ground. In case of heavy infestation 50 
per cent of the crop may be destroyed in this way.,. A single 
lock of a boll may^be infested. In such a case the remaining 
locks develop, but the boll opens prematurely and the fibre is 
short and kinky... Moreover the work of the insect leaves stains 
in the fibre... Mills ordinarily obtain from 19 to 20 'h of oil, the 
amount. ..was found... reduced to from 16 to 17%... In many 
cases the infestation must be so high that at least double the us- 
ual quantity of cotton seed must be used to secure a stand." 

I P- 4) 

The insect seems to pass the winter as larva and pupa in 
cotton seed exclusively, although "pupa have sometimes been 
found in the lint." (p. 6) Thus the insect can be attacked by 
utilizing the seed not wanted for planting before emergence takes 
place, or else, the seed has to be sacked or kept in a screened 
room to avoid the escape of the moths. There seems to be dif- 
ficulty to separate the infested seed from the uninfested. 

All in all the means of control described by me for the con- 
trol of the boll weevil seem to fit this new comer to a dot. The 
tallen squares and young bolls, of course, can be attacked in no 
other way than by poultry. Given the choice, there is every rea- 
son to believe that later in the season they would forsake the old 
plants to oviposit on the trap-patch advocated for the control of 
the boll weevil and the bollworm. 

There is a strong suspicion that if it were attempted to con- 
trol the insects by early destruction of the plants, it would read- 
ily learn to feed and breed in plants other than cotton. The 
adults during the whole season will during the day time be hid- 
ing about the plants, and many will be found by poultry. In 
addition, if further means of control were necessary, it is highly 



(35) 

probable that this insect can be easily trapped by the use of a 
torch fitted as a trap, as described by me in short on pages 7 & 
8 of my Circular No. 151. 

In my Circular No. 139 and subsequent Circulars, I had 
shown from official tests and tests made by myself that the cod- 
ling moth is but little attracted by light, if the light is diffused 
through an opaque globe and is thus diffused pretty evenly all 
over a room, and that on the other hand the codling moth is 
strongly attracted to light that is thrown upon spots, as happens 
in case a common lamp has a stiff paper shade and throws its 
light upon a table and leaves the rest of the room in darkness. 
Spiders, flies and mosquitoes cannot be said to be attracted to 
light, yet I have repeatedly known them to make their way to 
light under the latter conditions. The Entomologist was want- 
ed for five years past to test this point out to his heart's content. 
Having done nothing, he now wants to claim I am wrong. 

In using a torch for a trap the insects are originally in 
darkness without, and can only come to the light by entering 
between two corresponding cone-shaped attachments about an 
inch and a half apart and encircling the red hot burner. The 
narrow quarters within causes the insect to bump against the 
red hot burner and against the cone-shaped attachments, be- 
coming thus temporarily disabled. This causes .them to drop 
and thus fall through a hole in fhe center of the lower attach- 
ment into a pail below 7 , to get killed by the downward blast from 
the torch. 

The entomologist's idea of trapping consists in placing pans 
with water and kerosene near electric lights. Utterly impracti- 
cable as this was shown to be on page 7 of my Circular No. 151 
a catch of any kind would thus be quite accidental. In a cotton 
field for the bollworm moth a large pan with a lantern set on 
bricks is the method that has been used in tests by Entomoli- 
sists. A few moths were thus caught. The wonder is that any 
were caught. In the first place the light in this case is diffused 
over too great an area offering no special inducement to come 



(36) 

close D3 r or' to sit down on the water and kerosene, Then again, 
if a bollworm moth accidentally sits down upon the water, being 
a strong bodied moth, it is liable to get away. This holds good 
especially with the hard bodied kinds which are not immediately 
affected by the kerosene. 

There is urgent need for the introduction of a trap that 
traps. The female of the European pine shoot moth for instance 
lays her ioo eggs singly in the top buds of the shoots, selecting 
as far as practicable the apical cluster of buds on young trees. 
I had shown that on young trees these apical buds can be pro- 
tected b>' pouring some semi-liquid clay over them before the 
period of ovipositing begins. This of course, is purely a repel- 
lant measure. To secure material reduction of the insect the on- 
ly feasible means is the use of a trap that traps, such as de- 
scribed b} 7 me. In this case there is utalized for a trap an ap- 
paratus intended to b* used during the day for other work. 

The European pine-shoot mooth was introduced daring the 
same period and through the same importation which brought in 
the disease known as white pine blister rust. Naturally it is 
spread over much the same territory. 

As to natural enemies of the pine shoot moth "As earh r as 
1838 Hartig recorded 14 ichneumonid wasps and a tachined fly., 
to promote the good work of these parasites specially construct- 
ed rearing houses have been created in Europe during bad out- 
breaks..." (U. S. D. A. Bull. No. 170, p. 9.) This shows that 
to encourage the increase of parasites is nothing new. In spite 
of this work, however, and of collecting infested shoots as a reg- 
ular measure, '75 acres of young pines planted in 1878 became 
infested to such an extent that hardly a shoot was spared, and 
in 1884 the entire plantation presented a pitiful, crippled appear- 
ance." (p. 3.) "The species attacks mainly young trees between 
6 and 15 years of age, but it is often excessively destructive to 
younger plantings and seedlings and injures also the other trees, 
(page 3.) 



(37) 

Thus it will be seen that protection of the apical bud by an 
application of semi-liquid clay is quite feasible in a very large 
part of cases. Since these same trees are even then preferred 
for oviposition, by operating a satisfactory trap in such plant- 
ings the number of moths can be greatly reduced. All this and 
more was described originally in my Circular No. 145, in 1915. 

Farmers' Bulletin No. 856 has recently appeared. It treats 
on the diseases and insect enemies of the home vegetable garden. 
On page 35, relative to the control of the harlequin cabbage bug 
you read: "...The plumber's torch is effective for this pest, de- 
stroying all the insects with which the flame comes in contact.,. 
These torches are not practical against many other insects and 
their use should be restricted to this species and a few others.." 

I was first, in 1898 to point out the use of a plumber's torch 
against this insect. I also at that same time showed that the 
adults congregate upon tassels of sweet corn, hence can be pick- 
ed off there, with the torch, or by hand. I also then showed that 
the flame and heat generated by the torch is the most practical 
means of control in many other cases. For instance I showed 
it to be of great value against the chinch bug. x*\ccording to 
Entomology Bulletin No. 95, part 3, page $&, the Bureau now 
claims:, 'The flaming torch is not altogether satisfactory on ac- 
count of the liability of damaging the plants..." Ask them what 
other means they have and they tell you: "The burning of grass- 
es and rubbish about the farm to destroy chinch bugs has been 
often recommended and is doubtless the most effective measure to 
betaken against future ravages of the pest." (p. 36) 

Any one familiar with chinch bug emergence in the spring 
knows of the countless billions of winged adults that drift about 
during warm spells in April and Maw They come not only from 
"grasses and rubbish about the farm," but from woodlands as 
well, nothing to say about buildings. Such burning, in a few 
years, destroys most ol the fertility and ruins the farm by ero- 
sion. Moreover this burning may bring no practical results, be- 
cause the next spring and summer might be warm and moist 



C 3 8) 

and thus reduce the pest through the developement of parasitic 
fungi. 

Other means of combating chinch bugs, as given by the 
Bureau, are dust barriers, coal tar barriers and kerosene emul- 
sion. All of these admittedh T , have their drawbacks. Two points, 
called attention to by me as early as 1898, have been entirely 
ignored. They refer to the habit of the chinch bug to go into 
the ground during cool nights and cold days. Also that the 
torch should be used preferably during the cool parts of the day, 
especially in the cool part of the morning while the dew is on. 
In the case of chinch bugs traveling from harvested small-grain 
fields to corn, and there clustering on the outer rows, there is 
nothing to prevent the use of the torch during all of the night, 
this the more as at this period the nights are usually warm e- 
nough to prevent any great number of bugs to seek the protec- 
tion of clods about the plants. During a cold spell all the bugs 
will be hidden under the clods and a torch approaching and 
playing about the base of the plant gets them all without any 
injury whatever to the plant. 

I showed in 1898 that this holds good with many other in- 
sects and pronouncedly so with most of the cucurbit insects, 
showing that by carefully lilting a vine, especially in the early 
morning and letting a blast blow on the ground about the plant, 
the ground becomes usually at once fairly alive with insects. 

Later I showed that by mulching all or part of the plants 
with half-rotted manure especially inviting hiding places are fur- 
nished. I also showed that the foliage of cucurbits sustains a 
surprising amount of heat without injury, facilitating greatly the 
destruction of insects on the leaves, such as youni; squash-bugs 
or lice, located on the under side of the leaves. I also as early 
as that showed that such use of flame and heat destroys the 
spores of fungi with equal facility on the upper and lower side. 

Later, in my Circular No. 139 and subsequent Circulars I 
showed specifically that flea beetles are best attacked by taking- 
advantage of their habit. to spend the night under clods on the 



("39) 

ground, laying special emphasis on the need of making use of 
this feature in the control of the hopflea beetle on the Pacific 
coast. 

In Entomology Bulletin No. 82, part IV, p. 42 you read: 
"The (hop flea) beetles go into the bud scales or down under 
the clods at the base of the vine on cold nights, but when mild 
weather approaches they remain on the leaves..," And in No. 
66, part VI, p, 74 the manager of a large hop yard in British 
Columbia says: ...In the middle of July the beetles were so 
numerous that the ground was fairly alive with them. They go 
into the ground in the evening and come out again in the morn- 
ing..." 

There are two broods in British Columbia, the first emerg- 
ing during the end of April and first half of May. Naturally the 
thing to do is to go after this brood, since the nights are then 
cool and the pest can be cleaned out with the torch with the 
greatest ease, if necessary doing part of the work during the 
night. 

Compared with this the Bureau has nothing to offer that in 
any way approaches these results. And the same holds good 
111 a general way, in the case of all other flea beetles, with all 
lice and mealy bugs on growing crops, in fact with any insect 
requiring a contact insecticide or not readily amendable to the 
use of poison, such as is the cabbage worm and potato beetle 
M.ug).. 

In the case of the harlequin bug I had since shown that 
since the harlequin bug lays her eggs on a variety of cruciferous 
plants, wild and cultivated, and selects the underside of the 
leaves, the immature insects can usually not be seen without 
turning the leaves by hand, and 1 showed that far the easiest 
way ol control consists in seeing to it to have during all the 
season some cruciferous in bloom. The pollen then attracts the 
adults and being in plain sight, they can be picked off by hand, 
with a torch, or by the use of poultry. 

Of course the plumbers torch is not by any means the most 
practical kind of torch that can be used. A torch of the knap- 



( 4 o) 

sack type as shown on last page is the best thing all around. 
The onion thrips for instance is very destructive to onions, cab- 
bage and many other crops, the insect being capable of 6 or more 
generations in a season. It can best be attacked by having a 
blast blow along the row upon the ground, The insects while in 
the nymphal stage are very susceptible and unable to get away 
except by dropping to the ground, which however makes it pos- 
sible to destroy the pest without applying much heat to the plant 
ifself. 

An insect of greatest importance where the use of heat is 
far the best means in sight is the pear thrips. In my Circular 
No. 147, and elsewhere, I went into details showing that there 
is no difficulty to construct torches to treat big orchard trees. I 
showed on page 12 that the practicability of this system rests 
upon the fact that five gallons of gasoline will keep four burn- 
ers going 20 hours under a pressure of 30 to 40 pounds, There 
is nothing in the way of a spray, except where poison can be 
used to advantage, that approaches heat thus generated and ap- 
plied, as an insect killing agent for cheapness, where a contact 
insecticide is required. Canker worms or brown tail moth cat- 
erpillars, for instance, might be prese.nL These are practically 
immune to poison, while the use of a torch settles both th< 
and the pear thrips. A slight licking makes them fall to the 
ground where they are killed by further application ol heat. This 
insect has a wide range of food plants, wild and cultivated, and 
because of this requires an easy means of control to be success- 
fully combated. 

Hooverize! Hooverize is the cry! Hooverize is the official 
cry! We have the meatless dav and the wheatless day, but why 
can we not have the humbugiess day seven days in the week? 
Have the Congressional Committee on Agriculture take up the 
issues at question and you increase output of food by more than 
a ship load a week, by avoiding waste caused by insects and 
fungi, representing a value of more than a billion dollars a year. 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



000 888 426 2 



l 



